Titus Livy
Life The life of Titus Livius (or Livy, to use his more common English name), is not well known. Almost everything we know about the author of the voluminous History of Rome from its foundation is derived from a handful of anecdotes recorded by later authors, who may have found them in a (now lost) book by the Roman biographer Suetonius called Historians and philosophers. Nevertheless, we know something about Livy's life, and that is more than we can say about several other important ancient authors (e.g., Homer). The Christian author Jerome, an excellent chronographer, states that Livy was born in 59 BCE and died in 17 CE. There is no evidence to contradict this piece of information. It makes Livy a near contemporary of the Roman politician Octavian, who was born in 63, became sole ruler of the Roman empire in 31, accepted the surname Augustus in 27, and died in 14 CE. That Livy was born in Patavium (modern Padua) is clear from his own work. The historian Pollio mocked Livy's Patavian accent. We know nothing about his parents. Several inscriptions from Padua mention members of the Livius family, but none of them can convincingly be connected to the historian. However, we can be confident that he belonged to the provincial elite and that his family, although not very rich, had enough money to send him to competent teachers. On the other hand, Livy's difficulties with the Greek language make it clear that he did not enjoy higher education in, say, Athens, which a Roman boy from the richest families certainly would have visited. The History of Rome from its Foundation offers no indication that he ever traveled to Greece. Padua belonged to a province of the Roman empire that was known as Gallia Cisalpina. During Livy's youth, its governor was Julius Caesar, and it is likely that the boy often heard stories about the wars in Gaul. However, he never got used to military matters. His writings betray that he knew next to nothing about warfare. This, and his lack of political experience, would normally have disqualified Livy as a historian, but as we will see, he was able to write a very acceptable history. When he was about ten years old, civil war broke out between Caesar and Pompey the Great. It was decided in 48 during the battle of Pharsalus. Later, Livy recalled a miraculous incident. His own description is not known, but a century later, the Greek author Plutarch of Chaeronea retold the story: At Patavium, there was a well-known prophet called Gaius Cornelius, who was a fellow-citizen and acquaintance of Livy the historian. On the day of the battle this man happened to be sitting at his prophetic work and first, according to Livy, he realized that the battle was taking place at that very moment and said to those who were present that now was the time when matters were being decided and now the troops were going into action; then he had a second look and, when he had examined the signs, he jumped up in a kind of ecstasy and cried out: 'Caesar, the victory is yours!' Those who were standing by were amazed at him, but he took the garland from his head and solemnly swore that he would not wear it again until facts had proved that his arts had revealed the truth to him. Livy, certainly, is most emphatic that this really happened.note There is another story about his youth. The Roman philosopher Seneca tells that when Livy was a young man, he wrote philosophical essays. It may be true, although Livy's writings do not betray a profoundly philosophical mind. However this may be, anecdotes like these give us the impression that the future historian was a serious young man, and this is also the impression one gets from his writings. He lacks irony and humor. On the other hand, he shows a great understanding of human psychology and has great sympathy with suffering people. We may find his gravity and earnestness a bit hard to stomach, but Livy had a heart. After the violent death of Julius Caesar, a new round of civil war followed. Padua played a minor role and it is possible that the young Livy witnessed some of the fighting in 44/43. In 31, Caesar's adopted son Octavian was victorious, and many people had a feeling that now, after eighteen years of fratricide, the situation in Italy would normalize. Academic studies were resumed. The poet Virgil wrote his optimistic Georgics and Greek authors like Dionysius of Halicarnassus and Strabo of Amasia came to the capital. Livy seems to have shared in this mood, and published the first five books of his History of Rome from its foundation between 27 and 25. By now, he was in his early thirties. We don't know anything about Livy's private life, but an average Roman man would at this age be married and have children. Quintilian states that the historian had a son, for whom he wrote a treatise on style, and a daughter, who was married to a teacher of oratory named Lucius Magius. Pliny the Elder quotes a geographical work written by a son of Livy. The History of Rome from its foundation was meant as an example to the Romans. They had suffered, but that had been due to their own, immoral behavior. However, a moral revival was still possible, and Livy offered some uplifting and cautionary tales. It was a serious and important project, and Augustus was interested in it. Livy did not belong to the inner circle of Rome's first emperor, nor was he a protégé of Maecenas, but the historian and the emperor respected each other and we know that Augustus once (perhaps after the publication of Books 91-105) made a good-natured joke that Livy still was a supporter of Pompey, the enemy of Caesar. If this was a reproach at all, it was not serious. Livy remained close enough to the imperial court to encourage the young prince Claudius to write history. (The future emperor became a productive author: his histories of Rome, Carthage and the Etruscans consisted of sixty-nine books.) Until Livy's death, he wrote on his History of Rome from its foundation. We do not know its publishing history, but the following is a plausible reconstruction: He became a well-known person, and there is a famous anecdote, told by Pliny the Younger, that once, a man came all the way from Cadiz in Andalusia, from the legendary edges of the earth, to see the historian. Yet, Livy was not a very popular man. There were, it is said, never many visitors when he recited from his work. Compared to his more popular contemporary, the elegant poet Ovid, the serious historian from Padua lacked charm, irony, and other cosmopolitan qualities. His world view never was that of the Roman literary elite; he always remained a provincial. It comes as no surprise that Livy probably died at Padua. It is possible that Livy owned a house somewhere to the northeast of Rome, because he gives remarkably accurate descriptions of the valley of the river Anio. Scope of the History of Rome The History of Rome from its foundation was a very, very large work. All in all, there were 142 books. Of course, these were not real books in our sense, but scrolls, the length of which is identical to about 65 pages in a modern pocket book. The total size of Livy's work is, therefore, the equivalent of some 9,250 pages or 31 pocket books. He wrote all this in about 45 years, which means that every year, he published three-and-a-fifth scrolls or 205 pages. Even with a computer and a word processor, this is impressive. It is clear that Livy had to make use of earlier histories and did not have the opportunity to do additional research in archives. We will discuss the consequences of this lack of originality below. What does Livy have to tell? Unfortunately, his work was too large to survive. A century after his death, an Epitome was published by Publius Annius Florus, and many people preferred this and similar abridged editions. As a consequence, few people cared about the originals. We still possess the books 1-10 and 21-45 and this is not likely to change (although surprise finds in the Egyptian desert or the Vesuvius area can never be completely be ruled out). Fortunately, the contents of the remainder (11-20 and 46-142) are known from a fourth-century excerpt, the Periochae. We can also deduce something of its nature from texts based on the original. For example, it is likely that Lucan's Pharsalia, a poem on the Roman civil wars in which Pompey the Great is the hero and Julius Caesar the villain, is based on Livy's History of Rome from its foundation. The work was organized in pentads and decades, groups of five and ten scrolls. The first pentad deals with the origins of Rome until the summer of 386 BCE. (Or 390 according to the chronological system of Varro, which Livy did not use. Unlike many modern scholars, Livy understood its errors.) In the first book, he tells the legends of Rome as a kingdom; he continues with the establishment of the republic by Brutus and Valerius Publicola; and after an account of the difficult fifth century (books 2, 3, and 4), this part of the history culminates in a breath-taking account of the capture of Veii, the sack of Rome by the Gauls, and its second foundation under the auspices of Marcus Furius Camillus (book 5). The circle is closed. This part of the History of Rome from its foundation was completed in c.26 (it mentions Octavian's new name Augustus but does not mention the closing of the temple of Janus in 25). It is clear that Livy presents Camillus, victorious in war and second founder of the city, as the alter ego of the emperor Augustus. It is interesting to note that Camillus is once called dux, a title that Octavian had also used. The second part consisted of ten books, which dealt with the conquest of Italy. We possess the first half of this decade, Books 6 to 10. In the beginning, Rome is still recovering from the crisis, but it raises itself up by the support of Camillus. At the end of book 10, the Romans have defeated the Etruscans, Umbrians, Gauls, and Samnites at Sentinum (295 BCE). Although the story of the unification of the Apennine peninsula is not yet over - a new pentad will be needed - the decisive battle has been won by the personal sacrifices of famous Romans like Publius Decius Mus. Again, this is in line with the propaganda of Augustus. The next five books of the History of Rome from its foundation is lost. Yet it is clear from the Periochae that this pentad was a continuation of Books 6-10. The second half of the unification of Italy involves wars against foreign powers, like king Pyrrhus of Epirus and Carthage. When Livy wrote at his average speech of three-and-a-fifth scrolls per year, he will have finished the decade on the conquest of Italy in c.24. Just like the first fifteen books, the next group of fifteen consisted of a pentad and a decade. In the books 16-20, the first conflict with Carthage is described: the First Punic War, the longest and greatest military conflict in the ancient world. The Second Punic War, a conflict of lesser size, receives ten books - five dealing with the successes of the Carthaginian general Hannibal (including a splendid account of his crossing of the Alps) and five dealing with the successes of his Roman opponent Publius Cornelius Scipio. This lack of balance is explainable: it stems from Livy's most important source, the World History of Polybius of Megalopolis, who was fascinated by the figure of Hannibal and had not much to say about the earlier war. When Livy continued his work in c.19 BCE, he suddenly became tired, if we are to believe the preface to the next pentad: The sixty-three years from the First Punic War to the end of the Second have taken up as many volumes as the 488 years from the foundation of the city to the consulship of Appius Claudius, who began the first hostilities against the Carthaginians. And when this fact comes home to me, I feel like someone who has been introduced into shallow waters near the shore and is now advancing into the sea. I picture myself being led on into vaster ... depths with every forward step. The task undertaken seemed to grow less with the completion of the early stages; now, in anticipation, it seems almost to increase as I proceed.note That Livy at this stage had to face certain realities is also suggested by the fact that his digressions start to become shorter. He had to hurry. Antiochus III The third group of fifteen books deals with the conquest of the eastern Mediterranean in the years 201-167. Here, three powerful kingdoms opposed Rome: Macedonia, the Seleucid empire in Asia, and the Ptolemaean empire of Egypt. In Books 31-35, we read how the Romans dealt with Macedonia and liberated Greece; in the next pentad, war is waged against the Seleucid king Antiochus III the Great; and in the last five books, the Macedonian kingdom is liquidated after the battle of Pydna. The climax is a Roman embassy to Alexandria, where Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who is about to conquer Egypt, is forced to return home. The reader who had reached this point, in c.14 BCE, knew that Rome how Rome had become a superpower. The next decade (Books 46-55), now lost, mark the turning point in Roman history, according to Livy. Rome now has to behave like a superpower, but fails to live up to its responsibilities. At first, it is able to impose its will on struggling Ptolemaean princes, but in Book 48, everything starts to change. In the first place, the seeds of a new and unnecessary war are sown: the Third Punic War, which is provoked by the Romans and leads to the destruction of Carthage (in Book 51). According to most Roman historians, this removed a check on the Roman character. From now on, luxury and decadence became important, and the Romans lost their ancestral qualities. This is already shown in Book 48, in which general Servius Sulpicius Galba becomes a war criminal in Hispania, where a local leader named Viriathus punishes the Romans until Book 54 - when he is betrayed and murdered. At the same time, the Romans conquer Greece (Book 52). At the end of Book 55, the Roman legions for the first time see the Ocean (in Portugal) and the edges of the earth. This is the fitting end of a crucial decade. Livy reached this point in c.11 BCE. The following decade (56-65) consists of two clearly divided pentads. The first deals with a new round of Spanish wars, which culminate in the capture of the Celtiberian capital Numantia. In Rome, the central theme is the struggle against the reforms proposed by Tiberius and Gaius Sempronius Gracchus. The battle in which the latter is killed means that the Romans sadly start to use full-scale violence against each other. Meanwhile, foreign enemies like the Numidian king Jugurtha and the Germanic tribes of the Cimbri and Teutones become very dangerous. It is likely that Livy presented their successes as the result of the moral collapse of Rome. (A reference to a speech on marriage by Augustus in Book 59 proves that this part was written after 9 BCE.) Book 65 was, if the Periocha is reliable, one big catalogue of Roman disasters. The so-called Marius This decade was probably published together with the next twenty-five books (66-90), which are dedicated to the conflict between two rivaling Roman statesmen: Marius and Sulla. The first five books deal with the rise of general Marius. In books 71-76, Livy deals with the Social War, in which the Romans have to fight against their own allies, which demand citizenship. After their victory, the Romans wage war against king Mithridates of Pontus, without being able to overcome him. General Sulla merely neutralizes the problem, returns to Italy and rules the country as a dictator. This part of the History of Rome from its foundation, which dealt with the problems caused by the divisions among the Romans and ended with the death of Sulla, was probably published at the beginning of our era. It can not have been very uplifting reading. Although the books are now lost, we still possess the Periochae, from which we learn that Livy very frequently stated that political affairs were settled per vim, "with violence". Other stock phrases are avaritia and crudelitas, "avarice" and "cruelty" Pompey the Great Books 91-105 deal with the rise of Pompey, Crassus, and Caesar and must have been published in c.5. We learn how the young Pompey successfully fights against the rebel leader Sertorius in Hispania, allies himself to Crassus and becomes consul, and later fights against the Cilician pirates, Mithradates, and the Jews. (Go here for the story. Livy's description of the capture of Jerusalem was used by the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus.) In the last books, the creation of the First Triumvirate ("a conspiracy against the state by its three leading citizens"), and Caesar's sensational wars in Gaul are described. Book 105 ends with the campaigns on the other side of the Rhine and Channel. This climax suggests that Livy's message was that the Romans, if they could overcome their divisions, could achieve great things. It is interesting to note that there is a digression on the customs of the Germanic tribes in Book 104, which suggests that Livy used contemporary reports on the campaigns of the Roman generals Drusus and Tiberius. Julius Caesar The next decade deals with Caesar's coup d'état. Book 106 starts with the death of Julia, daughter of Caesar and wife of Pompey. From now on, the harmonious relations between the triumvirs are gone and disaster follows disaster. The Belgian leader Ambiorix defeats Caesar's legions, and the Parthian commander Surena defeats the soldiers of Crassus at Carrhae. In the Periocha of the next book, we read about civil strife in Rome, and Caesar's defeat at Gergovia. After he has been able to restore order (Book 108), the strained relations between Pompey and Caesar deteriorate, and civil war breaks out. Livy uses seven books to describe the successes of Caesar; the battle of Pharsalus in 48 BCE is the subject of Book 111. It contained a personal anecdote by Livy, who as a boy witnessed a seer who "saw" the battle, even though he was not at Pharsalus but in Padua. The decade ends with Caesar's fourfold triumph (Book 115). It was probably published in 8, and may have encouraged the Romans, who were suffering severe military setbacks in Illyricum. In the hundred-and-sixteenth book, Livy describes how Brutus and Cassius assassinate Caesar (44 BCE). Livy's judgment of the dictator has survived: "It can not be decided whether it was better for the commonwealth for Caesar to be born, or never to be born." (fragment 16). This pentad describes the war between Caesar's former supporter Marc Antony and his adopted son Octavian (the War of Mutina). This is much space for a period of two years, but Padua, where Livy born, was part of this war and he may have considered it to be more important than we do. Book 120 describes how the two rivals and Lepidus conclude the Second Triumvirate, an event that marked the beginning of the reign of Octavian. Livy published this pentad in c.10 and it is possible that he again stressed that rulers should work together, a theme that became increasingly important in the Augustean propaganda of this age. (At the same time, a temple was dedicated to Concordia.) Augustus Now Livy had to deal with the triumviral years of Octavian, a violent period in which the man who was to give the world a new golden age, behaved like a criminal. Modern scholars have made much of the remark in the Periocha of Book 121 that the next books were published "after the death of Augustus". But we do not have to assume that Livy's treatment of the subject matter was too politically incorrect to be published. Probably, he just wanted to commemorate the reign of Augustus, who was the main character of the rest of his work. Several scholars have suggested that Book 133, in which Livy described the battle of Actium, was meant to be the original ending of the History of Rome from its foundation. If we assume that Livy still wrote three-and-a-fifth scrolls per year, he would have reached Actium at the time of the death of Augustus. No wonder that Livy wanted to record this fact in a preface. In Books 121-133 he described the war of the triumvirs against Brutus and Cassius, culminating in the battle of Philippi (Book 124); Marc Antony's war against the Parthians (Book 128); Octavian's war against Sextus Pompeius and the fall of Lepidus (Book 129); the romance of Antony and Cleopatra; Antony's failed Parthian campaign (Book 130); the battle of Actium and finally the suicide of Antony and Cleopatra (Book 133). Having reached this point, Livy had finished his work. He had told the history of Rome until the moment when he had started to write, believing that after the fratricidal civil wars an age of moral revival was possible. The Roman world had become more peaceful indeed, but he must have noticed that the republic, with its public debates, had changed into a monarchy, where decisions were taken by one man and his friends. Livy was not close enough to the emperor to know about the real policy-making and was therefore unable to produce anything like the preceding thirty-three books, in which he had described 24 years. After Book 134, the speed of his story almost quadruples: he describes 22 years in just nine books. It is probable that he wanted to continue until Book 150 and the death of Augustus. The story was completely different from the preceding books and it is possible that Livy now lost interest in his story. It is likely that Book 134 started with the words of fragment 58: I have now earned fame enough and might make an end, except that my restless mind feeds on the work. So, Livy continued to write. The Periochae of the last books are extremely brief and do not suggest that they made exciting reading. It was not Livy's fault. The times had been changing. After all, the sad paradox of historiography is that only wars and catastrophes furnish materials for history. If the last books of the History of Rome from its foundation were boring, it was because Livy's own age was a fortunate one. Characteristics It had been the greatest dream of the Roman orator Cicero that once, there would arise a Roman author who would be able to write a history of Rome that would match the works of famous Greek writers like Herodotus of Halicarnassus and Thucydides. Had Cicero been able to read Livy's History of Rome from its foundation, he would have been very content. The Roman historian may have lacked the depth of a Thucydides and the humor of Herodotus, but his description of the birth and growth of the Roman republic is a piece of art indeed. Below, we will discuss three characteristics of Livy's masterpiece: 1. The influence of rhetoric 2. The structure 3. The main theme 1 The influence of rhetoric The work is clearly written by someone who was educated as an orator. When a Roman boy received rhetorical education, he often had to speak on historical subjects: for example, he had to argue what would had happened if this or that historical event had not taken place, or he had to give arguments for a certain policy in a hypothetical situation, or he had to impersonate a historical figure. Livy must have been a master in this game, because the speeches are the best parts of the History of Rome from its foundation. Often, Livy inserts orations, which he has composed himself. Although the presence of invented speeches strikes us as odd -they are not historical facts and do, therefore, not belong in a work of history- this way to embellish the plain facts was a normal practice in ancient historiography. (In fact, the custom is even older than historiography, because the first historian, Herodotus, introduced speeches in his Histories to emulate Homer.) Speeches usually served to explain why a person acted as he did. Livy, however, has a second motive to write speeches: he uses them to create psychological portraits. They are convincing, which adds to the charm of his books. Book 9 contains an interesting digression, in which Livy defends a thesis that must have originated in the rhetorical school: he argues that if the famous Macedonian conqueror Alexander the Great had not attacked the Persian empire, but had instead gone west, he would have been defeated by the Romans. 2 The structure If we ignore the first book, which contains legends about the kings that once ruled Rome, Livy's history has a very simple structure: he describes the events of one year at a time. • First, he mentions the magistrates that gave their names to the year. Usually they were consuls, except for the second half of the fifth and first third of the fourth centuries, when military tribunes occupied the highest office. • After this beginning, Livy describes the most important events abroad, usually wars. • He then continues with the events in Rome. Because he always describes what happened at home, the History of Rome from its foundation has retained, in spite of the fact that it deals with world history, the character of a local chronicle. The reader is therefore never left with a feeling that the world is too large and the story too complex. • Finally, Livy describes other events that deserve to be mentioned, such as omens, plagues, food shortages, and building projects Having dealt with these concluding remarks, he starts with the next year. Unlike historians like Polybius of Megalopolis and Tacitus, Livy never chooses a more thematic approach, clustering, for example, the events in Hispania of several years together. Livy inherited this strict order from earlier Latin historians, the Annalists. We will return to them later. Sometimes, he digresses on related subjects like the early history of the Gauls (Book 5), the structure of the Roman army (Book 8), the origins of Carthage (Book 16), the settlement of Gauls in Anatolia (Book 38), the etymology of the word 'Baleares' (Book 60), or the customs of the Germanic tribes (Book 104). Usually, the digressions are brief, and they do not seriously interfere with the normal pattern of his narrative. As we have already seen, Livy treats several years in one book. The larger divisions of the History of Rome from its Foundation are units of five, ten, or fifteen books. As far as the author of the present article knows, no other ancient historian has used a similar system. However, Livy is no slave to this division. The Third Punic War was treated in Books 48-51, which belong to two pentads. There were separate editions of the Books 109-116, which were called the Eight Books on the Civil war, and it is possible that Livy regarded them as a unit too. 3 The main theme Like most ancient historians, Livy was a moralist. He was deeply concerned about the degeneration of the Romans, which had started after the fall of Carthage in 146. Luxury and decadence had become normal, and Livy often complains about it. Rich people behaved frivolously and set a bad example to poorer Romans, who no longer kept their place. They started to make political demands, which had caused the rise of the Gracchi and the civil wars. In the preface to the History of Rome from its foundation, Livy addresses the reader: Let him note how, with the gradual relaxation of discipline, morals first subsided, as it were, then sank lower and lower, and finally began the downward plunge which has brought us to our present time, when we can endure neither our vices nor their cure. Rome had conquered the world but lost its soul. This was hardly an original theme. In 42 or 41, the historian Sallust had said the same in the preface to his Catiline Conspiracy, and Augustus shared the analysis. What Livy tried to show in his writings, the emperor tried to cure with legislation on (a.o.) luxury and marriage. A moral revival was still possible. Livy played his part in this revival. Men had to be courageous and take responsibility for public live; chastity and life at home were a woman's tasks, which were equally important. (We may think that this is an anti-feminist attitude, but Livy has, compared to other ancient authors, a sincere and a respectful attitude towards women.) In his story, he often gave examples how courage and piety had been rewarded, and how incorrect behavior was punished. For example, in Book 22 he tells how in 217, Gaius Flaminius accepted the consulship without the necessary rituals, and immediately launched a military campaign against Hannibal. Livy says that many senators found this outrageous and considered it "not a war against the enemy, but a war against the gods". When Flaminius is defeated at the Trasimene lake, Livy does not return to this reproach (instead he describes the suffering of the relatives of those missing in action), but the message is clear: the gods had punished the Romans. Although Livy shared Augustus' concerns, he was not a mere writer of propaganda. His own first concern was the historical truth, and nothing else. One example may suffice. The Romans had the custom that a commander who killed a foreign general in a duel, would offer the enemy's arms to Jupiter Feretrius. These spolia opima were very prestigious, and only two republican commanders ever visited the temple of Jupiter Feretrius: Cossus in the late fifth century and Marcellus in 222. In 29 BCE, however, a Roman commander named Marcus Licinius Crassus (grandson of the triumvir) claimed spolia opima. To the emperor Augustus, this was too much prestige for an ordinary commander, and he invented a new rule, saying that only consuls were entitled to this honor. Unfortunately, Cossus had not been consul, but Augustus, walking into the temple, pretended to read an inscription which recorded his consulship. When Livy describes Cossus' victory,note he states that the war hero had been a tribune, and mentions in something that looks like a footnote that Augustus disagreed with the entire historical tradition. Our historian goes on to ask how all the lists of magistrates could possibly have contained such a big mistake. He nowhere explicitly says that Augustus was a liar, but the message was clear. Sources Livy boasted that he had read all relevant Greek and Roman books of history, and there is no reason to doubt this proud statement. On the other hand, it does not guarantee that what he writes is correct. This is not because he is a bad historian. He is deeply concerned to tell the truth and sometimes interrupts his story for remarks that betray a critical attitude: Some writers have estimated the casualties, both our own and the enemy's, at many times the number; I myself, apart from my unwillingness to exaggerate on insufficient evidence, that all too common vice of historians, have based my account on Fabius, a contemporary witness of these events.note This story is more fit to be displayed on the stage, that delights in wonders, than to be believed, and is worth while neither to affirm nor to refute.note Modern scholars complain about Livy's many topographical errors, but he is known to have traveled to Liternum (near Naples) to visit a monument that was dedicated to Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus.note The problem is not Livy's lack of critical attitude, but the quality of his sources. There are, essentially, two types of historians: the researcher who studies archives and writes a critical monography on a subject, and the author of a synthesis, who wants to present his readers with an entertaining narrative about a large-scale subject. It should be stressed that Livy belonged to this second category. He was a writer of history, not a researcher - or, to use the German words, a Geschichtsschreiber, not a Geschichtsforscher. He wanted to compose a history of Rome, and therefore, he had to rely upon and trust other sources. If he wanted to succeed, and there was simply no time to check the statements he found in his sources. This does not mean that he was not interested in the truth. When he noticed differences between several accounts, he informed the reader. But he was unable to solve the problem - he had to hurry. In the nineteenth and twentieth century, when historiography became a professional occupation, Livy was severely criticized. It was maintained that he should have visited the Roman state archive and that he should have done his best to establish the truth. Modern historians, it was said, certainly would have done so. Because this criticism ignores Livy's aims and intentions, it is unfair, undeserved, and unprofessional. Polybius Nevertheless, the question is relevant how Livy treated his sources. Fortunately, we can answer this question, because we can compare Books 21-33 of the History of Rome from its foundation with Livy's source, Books 3-18 of the World History by the Greek writer Polybius of Megalopolis (c.200-c.118). Our historian praises his predecessor as "an author by no means to be despised" and "a reliable authority on all Roman history".note He frequently uses Polybius and we can often hear verbal echoes. It seems that Livy simply retold in his own words what he had read in Polybius' World history. It is perhaps unkind to say so, but Livy's work is essentially a compilation of older sources. We know that there were other authors. In the first pentad, he used the histories of Quintus Fabius Pictor and Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi. They were Rome's first historians and belonged to the Annalistic tradition, in which the subject matter was presented in the strict year-by-year order that we also find in the History of Rome from its foundation. Livy also read and used the later Annalists: the conservative and unreliable Quintus Valerius Antias, and the progressive Gaius Licinius Macer. (In the 1960s, it was claimed that Livy used only these two sources and did not really read Pictor and Piso, but this is almost certainly incorrect.) In the second pentad, Livy could also use Quintus Claudius Quadrigarius. When he describes the war against Hannibal, Coelius Antipater and Polybius are the most important sources, but Valerius Antias is still used for the descriptions of the events in the city. In Books 31-45, Polybius, Antias and Claudius Quadrigarius were Livy's sources. All these books are lost. It is a testimony to the quality of Livy's work that almost all his sources are now lost. Livy's account is as good as his sources, and we are fortunate that he was able to evaluate the quality of them. However, many sources for Roman history were written in Greek, a language Livy did not fully understand. Therefore, the result of this method can at times be disastrous. For example, in a description of a siege in which miners and contraminers came to blows, Polybius writes (21.28.11) that some of them carried square shields, thyreous. Livy could have retranslated this back into his own language (scuta), but confused thyreous with thyras, "doors".note The result is that he presented the Romans as carrying doors along the tunnel! And yet, Livy is not uncritical. When he is not able to choose between variant accounts, he at least informs the reader that there are conflicting stories. It is interesting to compare his account of Hannibal's crossing of the Alps with the text of Polybius (go here for the two texts). The two descriptions ultimately go back to Sosylus of Lacedaemon, the author of seven books on Hannibal. Polybius uses this author directly, and Livy indirectly. However, he carefully copies a text that was already a careful copy. The result is better than Polybius' story. There are six points where we can compare the accounts of Polybius and Livius with the natural situation (more), and it turns out that Livy's story fits five of these, whereas Polybius' story fits only two of them. In other words, Livy knew how to choose a good source. Given his aim to write a synthesis of Roman history, this was all he needed. Assessment Assessment In Antiquity, Livy was praised by many authors. Writing during the reign of the emperor Domitian, Quintilian states that Romans Livy and Sallust were the equals of the Greek historians Herodotus of Halicarnassus and Thucydides.note This was, at the end of the first century, the greatest praise possible. (It was only during the age of the Severan emperors that the Romans had sufficient cultural self-confidence to bluntly state that they no longer cared about Greek civilization.) When Livy told a story, Quintilian said, it was clear as crystal, and his speeches were eloquent beyond description. Quintilian was not the only one to praise the author of the History of Rome from its Foundation. In 79, Pliny the Younger preferred reading Livy to the spectacle of the explosion of the Vesuvius. In the Middle Ages and Renaissance, Livy was still admired for his style, and this has never changed. Of course, a historian unable to tell a story should start looking for another job. But he must possess other qualities as well, and modern scholars have severely criticized Livy because he did not seem to possess these qualities. As we have already seen above, much of this criticism is misdirected. It was not Livy's aim to write a critical monography. He wanted to describe the entire history of the republic and hoped to offer examples to well-meaning Romans, who wanted to recover the old Roman qualities. Moral revival is the only relevant test of the History of Rome from its foundation, but unfortunately we can not establish the measure of Livy's success. Yet, we use the History of Rome from its foundation as a source of information on the Roman republic, and we are justified to ask how reliable its author is, even though this may not have been Livy's own first concern (although he was, in spite of the speed of his writing, certainly interested in telling the truth). He has been accused of grave errors. The chronology of the first ten books was erroneous; he told stories twice when he found them in two sources under different years (a doublet); and worst of all, his account of the greatness of Rome under king Tarquin the Proud in Book 1 was a straightforward lie, meant as propaganda for the monarchy of Augustus. But opinions can change. On closer inspection, it turns out that Livy's chronological system is better than the Varronian chronology, which many modern historians still use. (The reason why is one of the profoundest secrets of modern historiography.) Livy's doublets turn out to be less frequent than has been assumed. And archaeologists have fully confirmed the greatness of Rome in the sixth century. This does not mean that Livy is now regarded as the most reliable of all ancient historians, but we can no longer approach his work as mere propaganda. Although he and his annalistic predecessors have often embellished the plain facts, the hard core of Livy's information is essentially reliable. The burden of proof lies with those who want to maintain that a particular statement of Livy is untrue. Livy, The Periochae The Periochae are not the only summary of Livy's History: in the Egyptian town Oxyrhynchus, a similar summary of books 37-40 and 48-55 was found on a scroll of papyrus that is now in the British Museum. However the Oxyrhynchus Epitome is damaged and incomplete. This leaves us with the Periochae as our most important tool to reconstruct the general scope of Livy's monumental History of Rome from its beginning. The books that were used by the maker of the Periochae appear to have been in bad condition. When we can control the text of the complete books with a summary (i.e., Books 1-10 and 21-45), sometimes the sequence of the events, as given in the Periochae, is not identical to that in the real books. At the very end, summaries of two books (136 and 137) are lacking, although it is possible that they have been integrated in the Periocha of book 141. Another remarkable aspect of the Periochae is that they tend to become shorter, as is shown in the picture below. There is no explanation for this phenomenon. Probably the epitomator was simply tired, but it can not be excluded that it partly reflects that Livy's books tend to become shorter, something is evident in books 30-45. Links Titus Livy's History of Rome Online Category:Lawful Good Category:Writers Category:Heroes with Faith Category:Heroes of Religion Category:Officials Category:Freethinkers Category:Truthers Category:Pagans Category:Genius Category:Book Authors Category:Heroic Creator Category:Brave Heroes Category:Italian Heroes' Category:Heroes of antiquity Category:European Heroes Category:Married Heroes Category:Ancient Category:Peaceful Heroes Category:Politicians Category:Deceased Heroes Category:Teachers Category:Philosophers